They don't do pity. If the increased offer means you can't get the pick either by withdrawing it and replacing it with the original demand or by leaving the new offer there to be declined, they won't change things so you do get the pick. But if one of those options means getting the pick, they should be able to tell you that.

Posted by tropicana on 9/3/2013 3:59:00 PM (view original):When you have a contract offer to an FA, and you get a message that someone is outbidding you, your offer status in effect until you do something. When you increase the offer, THAT withdraws the previous contract offer and institutes the next one. It's a nuance that you may say isn't obvious, but it actually does show that very information on the player's FA page. It shows all your previous contract offers and your current one. It says the other offers were all withdrawn.

It's not especially intuitive, I will grant that, but since you seem to want to compare the two systems, that's your connection right there.

Ok I give up. This absolutely ludicrous, I'm not going to argue anymore after this.

I assume the reason why you must keep your offer out there without withdrawing it in order to get a comp pick is that so an owner can't just neglect a weak 1st round pick and use the bonus funds somewhere else.

This is not what is going on in my case. I INCREASED my offer which means I wasn't trying to skirt the system and I would leave it out there for the rest of the season (thus making it essentially the same thing as if I never offered my draft pick a HIGHER AMOUNT because I thought this would help). How this could be considered a "mistake" is beyond me. If I withdrew my offer instead of submitting a higher offer then this would be a different case. I was genuinely trying to sign my 1st round pick. It seems the veterans of this game think that the response that the draft pick gave is crystal clear to new comer. It's not. The system is confusing, and if I don't get a comp pick (assuming that I can't sign him), then that is just absolutely the most backwards logic.

I'll try this one more time - when you offer a new contract, it WITHDRAWS the old one. It even says it on the player negotiation page. I said it's not intuitive, but that the connection is there. That doesn't make it not fair, it just makes it nuanced like a lot of this game is. The first piece of advice Mike gave is right - don't do something if you don't know what the consequences might be....

And as I've said already, I didn't violate the spirit of the rules. It seems in order to get a comp pick one must offer the player his initial demand, then when the player says he isn't sure whether he is supposed to come back, the owner is supposed to somehow realize that increasing his offer will both 1) not make the player more likely to sign and b) will negate the chance to get a comp pick WITHOUT this being stated ANYWHERE in the help guide or FAQ. Explain to me how I should have realized this.

The point of the rule is so that you divert funds elsewhere. Increasing your offer should not stop you from getting a comp pick. Saying that I've negated my ability to get a comp pick is backwards logic.

Also, suggesting I should have asked the board because I wasn't "sure" isn't really applicable either. This is like saying I should I have asked the board if increasing my offer by $1mm will help me sign a FA because technically I'm not sure if this will help. Again, I didn't realize the negotiations were any different than everything else until after getting the same response twice. It seems that you guys prefer a game that logic holes to not be fixed rather than admit that me losing a comp pick in this situation makes no sense. I'd admit that if I withdrew my offer instead making a counter offer that is higher than the original one that I shouldn't be entitled to a comp pick. But that isn't the case here.

bg, if I was you, I would be doing anything I could to free up the cash to sign the player no matter what. He was the #2 in the draft. That's a player your franchise needs. I find all this talk about a comp pick next year counterproductive. If you're drafting #2 you need a cornerstone player, not a thanks for playing parting gift.

Ok, no there is no way to tell what he will ask for. My guess if he asks for more it will be in the $6-7M range. He may end up signing for what you offered but that was much more likely before you countered your own offer. The problem you believe that FA, IFA's and Coach signings are the same as trying to sign a draft pick. They're not. In this case you are negotiating with a player that only you have the rights to. In the other cases you're competing with other owners and then it may be wise to up your offer.

I'm guessing you've never been in sales or you would understand that by upping your offer without being asked to you were negotiating against yourself. When you do that if the player wants more money he works up from your last offer so it may have been cheaper to just wait him out until he decided that more money could convince him to play for you.

You're right that it doesn't make sense that you wouldn't get a comp pick if he can't be signed however the game hasn't been set up to adjust for all contingencies. Since it was sold to Fox a few years ago the development and upgrading of this game has pretty much ended although they talk about improvements on occasion.

Posted by grissom97 on 9/3/2013 6:21:00 PM (view original):Ok, no there is no way to tell what he will ask for. My guess if he asks for more it will be in the $6-7M range. He may end up signing for what you offered but that was much more likely before you countered your own offer. The problem you believe that FA, IFA's and Coach signings are the same as trying to sign a draft pick. They're not. In this case you are negotiating with a player that only you have the rights to. In the other cases you're competing with other owners and then it may be wise to up your offer.

I'm guessing you've never been in sales or you would understand that by upping your offer without being asked to you were negotiating against yourself. When you do that if the player wants more money he works up from your last offer so it may have been cheaper to just wait him out until he decided that more money could convince him to play for you.

You're right that it doesn't make sense that you wouldn't get a comp pick if he can't be signed however the game hasn't been set up to adjust for all contingencies. Since it was sold to Fox a few years ago the development and upgrading of this game has pretty much ended although they talk about improvements on occasion.

Ok thanks for the advice about the $ range and the insight about the development of the game. I did not know about that.

I understand the concept of "bidding against yourself" despite not working as a salesman, it is a rather easy concept to understand.

No one else seems to understand/take the perspective that in real life if a player said that they were debating going back to school, a way to motivate them would be to offer them more money. Since I assume this game tries to be as realistic as possible, I applied this logic to his message saying he was debating going back to school. If the message had been "this isn't about money, nothing you can increase your offer to would make me change your mind", then of course I wouldn't have raised my offer. This was my reasoning in increasing my offer which everyone seems to agree is an absurd notion to take for some odd reason.

"It seems that you guys prefer a game that logic holes to not be fixed rather than admit that me losing a comp pick in this situation makes no sense."

Where does anyone, ever, in this thread or elsewhere argue that he prefers anything other than a logical sysem. What everyone has tried, and tried, and tried to do is explain what the system is. You can **** in the wind all night that you didn't make a mistake because logically it should not have been a mistake. What we are telling you is that given the programming, what you did was a mistake.

There are many things that are not logical in the game: Everyone knowing what every other team has budgeted for each area; defensive skill and growth only affected by ratings, not years of practice a a position; some franchises not knowing the best prospect on the planet even exists; a 42-year-old who doesn't play not retiring as long as he stays on the 40-man roster; every team seeing 100% accurate current rankings of every plyer in the world; etc.

We play the game with all its flaws, but not because we prefer the flaws. Anyone who is still here playing does so knowing that few if any flaws are going to be fixed in the near future. The signing of draft picks probably doesn't make the top 10 on a list of things that could be improved.

Arguing that we don't understand what would happen in real life is just silly. The game does not mirror real life.

And as I've said already, I didn't violate the spirit of the rules. It seems in order to get a comp pick one must offer the player his initial demand, then when the player says he isn't sure whether he is supposed to come back, the owner is supposed to somehow realize that increasing his offer will both 1) not make the player more likely to sign and b) will negate the chance to get a comp pick WITHOUT this being stated ANYWHERE in the help guide or FAQ. Explain to me how I should have realized this.

The point of the rule is so that you divert funds elsewhere. Increasing your offer should not stop you from getting a comp pick. Saying that I've negated my ability to get a comp pick is backwards logic.

Also, suggesting I should have asked the board because I wasn't "sure" isn't really applicable either. This is like saying I should I have asked the board if increasing my offer by $1mm will help me sign a FA because technically I'm not sure if this will help. Again, I didn't realize the negotiations were any different than everything else until after getting the same response twice. It seems that you guys prefer a game that logic holes to not be fixed rather than admit that me losing a comp pick in this situation makes no sense. I'd admit that if I withdrew my offer instead making a counter offer that is higher than the original one that I shouldn't be entitled to a comp pick. But that isn't the case here.

1) the knowledge base answer says don't do anything until he rejects it. Three want anything unclear about it. 2) for the umpteenth time, by offering a second offer YOU WITHDREW THE FIRST. Acknowledge that and you're fine.

And as I've said already, I didn't violate the spirit of the rules. It seems in order to get a comp pick one must offer the player his initial demand, then when the player says he isn't sure whether he is supposed to come back, the owner is supposed to somehow realize that increasing his offer will both 1) not make the player more likely to sign and b) will negate the chance to get a comp pick WITHOUT this being stated ANYWHERE in the help guide or FAQ. Explain to me how I should have realized this.

The point of the rule is so that you divert funds elsewhere. Increasing your offer should not stop you from getting a comp pick. Saying that I've negated my ability to get a comp pick is backwards logic.

Also, suggesting I should have asked the board because I wasn't "sure" isn't really applicable either. This is like saying I should I have asked the board if increasing my offer by $1mm will help me sign a FA because technically I'm not sure if this will help. Again, I didn't realize the negotiations were any different than everything else until after getting the same response twice. It seems that you guys prefer a game that logic holes to not be fixed rather than admit that me losing a comp pick in this situation makes no sense. I'd admit that if I withdrew my offer instead making a counter offer that is higher than the original one that I shouldn't be entitled to a comp pick. But that isn't the case here.

1) the knowledge base answer says don't do anything until he rejects it. Three want anything unclear about it. 2) for the umpteenth time, by offering a second offer YOU WITHDREW THE FIRST. Acknowledge that and you're fine.

In regards to 1), actually that's not what the knowledge base says.

It says: "In order to receive the compensation pick, you must offer the player his initial demands, he must refuse to sign, and you must never withdraw your offer to the draft pick at any time."

Thus based on that wording, if you offer the player his initial demands, he rejects it and asks for me, you can't offer him a higher amount without increasing your offer which technically withdraws your first offer, thus you shouldn't get the comp pick right? Are you not allowed to increase your offer after he rejects the initial offer? Or is basically you can only make one offer to the draft pick, if he rejects it and asks for me, either you gamble that you can meet his higher demand or you never make another offer again?

Please relax, I'm talking about a hypothetical situation to show you how the wording may be unclear.

In a different, hypothetical situation, if an owner offers the player his initial demands, and then the player eventually rejects it and asks for higher demands, how can the owner offer the player his higher demands without withdrawing their initial offer and thus negating the ability to get a comp pick?